Was the Church correct in criticizing the LCWR? I see so many faithful Catholics upset about what the Church did in criticizing and “reforming” them or whatever. From what I have read I personally feel the Church acted correctly, but then again, who are we to judge and criticize the Church?
Concerning the recent statement by Cardinal Muller, one might also ask, was the Church correct in criticizing Galileo? Time will tell.
It’s not really possible for us to give a fair critique considering most of us have only the media reports to go by. If I’m going to assume anything, I’m going to assume that the Church is only acting out of the best interest for everyone involved and is doing so in the best way possible. I’ve seen nothing in any media report that would dissuade me from that assumption.
It is public knowledge that the LCWR holds positions which are not in accord with Catholic teaching. Since they call themselves Catholic and proclaim error, yes, the Church is totally correct in correcting them.
Sheesh, we just had a man forced out of his position because he held the heretical belief that marriage involves the union of two people of opposite sexes! The Church is being much more patient with the LCWR than the advocates of SS “marriage” were!
I’m curious as to why people seem to care so much about the LCWR.
I find it hard to imagine that anyone here is a member. I doubt that anyone here even knows a member. Since we’re not members we don’t attend their meetings or read their publications.
I guess it’s something like the SSPX. Someone from that group makes a statement or someone from the Vatican makes a statement about them and everyone runs around in a flurry. And like the LCWR, we don’t belong to the SSPX and there’s a good chance we don’t know any members personally. I guess there’s a better chance of knowing someone in the LCWR (membership of 1,400 source]) than the SSPX (membership of 569 source]).
The problem with the LCWR is that they represent the majority of women religious in this country (although many faithful religious oppose their views). They are canonically recognized as an arm of the Church, unlike the SSPX, which has no canonical status, no official affiliation. By their vocation, religious have a special responsibility to the Church. Often they are responsible for teaching the faith to young people.
Unfortunately, the LCWR has rebelled against the Church by continuing to support the ordination of women to the Priesthood after St. John Paul II said as a matter of faith it was impossible to do so. They have also promoted “Conscious Evolution," which boarders on gnosticism, a condemned heresy. Past keynote speakers at their conference have talked about "“moving beyond the Church, even beyond Jesus” (direct quote). They have defied the orders of the Holy See for forty years.
The Congregation of the Doctrine of the Faith exists to protect the faith. As St. John Paul II said in the front of his catechism, “Guarding the deposit of faith is the mission which the Lord has entrusted to his Church and which she fulfills in every age.” Having a canonical organization preaching falsehoods requires the CDF to step in, especially when that organization has a responsibility to teaching the faithful.
Good points…I dont know much about this but from my understanding the Church did a good job on how they corrected them. They did a thourough investigation for years from my understanding. Also, I dont believe all LCWR members were teaching falsly but if you have the head leadership teaching these things, than that is not good.
And that explains why the CDF is interested. It doesn’t explain why random people are so invested in the issue (or similarly, why random people are so invested in the SSPX). You don’t see topics started about whether the CDF was correct in various other actions they’ve taken.
I suppose to a certain extent with both of these groups, depending on which side “wins,” it becomes either a victory for liberals or a victory for conservatives. I guess what I want is less division overall, less of a feeling of the politics dividing us civilly also dividing us spiritually. Oh well…
What do these “faithful” Catholics believe the Church has “done” to the LCWR?
From what I’ve read, the average age of an LCWR member is something like 75. Their “majority” may dwindle significantly in the next years. Many faithful orders have average ages even in the upper 20s.
I know religious who are members of a congregation who are member of the LCWR. And part of the reason lay people are concerned is because the stuff that the CDF is trying to correct in the LCWR doesn’t just stay in the leadership positions but trickles down into congregations which are members and then finally into the work of the religious. Schools, hospitals, colleges/universities, retirement homes. I went to college which had a LCWR religious congregation on campus, and yes their strange ideas about “evolving conscious” were present along with other more traditional disputes with the Church (like allowing non-Catholics receive communion, women priests, abortion, and contraception,etc). They would spread their ideas in their theology classes, in books and poetry, during the liturgy of the hours and Mass which were open to the public, as well as advertised student and religious socials. That is why lay people are concerned.
As a mother, I am concerned about this because a nun holds a little more cachet than an ordinary layperson.
The L in LCWR stands for Leadership. It is an organization of leaders, so altho there are few actual members, the influence is much wider than its numbers would suggest.
I think if people are claiming to speak *as Catholics *that they need to speak in line with the teachings of the Church. If they are clear that what they are saying is their own personal opinion and that this differs or is not decided by the Church, that’s fine. The LCWR does not differentiate or clarify.
For instance: many laity still send their kids to Catholic
school. Many Catholic schools still have several Sisters
as teachers. Ours did and they were viewed as spiritual
authorities. If the Sisters are promoting false teachings
obviously the Church MUST step in.
. . . if you went into a McDonald’s restaurant, and all they served was pizza and spaghetti—had no hamburgers and fries—you’d feel very misled and would leave.
I think church leaders who keep an eye on church teachings are right to ask church members to teach church teachings----even if pizza is more fun.
As a church member, I want my Catholic teaching to be Catholic, and not just whatever stew of ideas someone somewhere doles out to me.
This is a power game. The American nuns are losing steam and they know it. Their leaders are sabre-rattling . . . (behind the scenes I think it plays out this way: “we’ll get upset and leave the church, and leave you priests and bishops with a lot of teaching, etc., positions to fill----unless you do it OUR way.”)
I can’t help but think the church leaders may have to say “adios” to the nuns and sisters. At the end of the day, they have to.
If they are upset about this then they are likely NOT faithful Catholics!
If they are not spreading the doctrines of the Church
they need to be reformed/disciplined.
In the real world they’d be fired.
I can’t work for Papa Johns Pizza and
send all my customers to Papa Murphy’s without
getting “reformed” by Papa Johns correct? Lol
Here is a report on Cardinal Kasper’s take on Muller’s ‘correction’: ncronline.org/news/vatican/cardinal-kasper-popes-theologian-downplays-vatican-blast-us-nuns
Yes, the Church is correct in doing this. They are doing two spiritual works of mercy: Admonishing sinners and Instructing the ignorant.
The problem with the LCWR is that they are remnants of the ‘spirit of Vatican II’ crowd and are a useful tool for liberal ‘catholics’ and media to promote their various agendas. I really do not think they represent the majority of women religious.